New York Times journalist Andrew Revkin recently wrote an interesting article about the ongoing tension between journalistic and scientific reporting of research, specifically addressing issues related to global warming and other “hot topics” in the news. With such attention given to these issues that lend themselves to alluring headlines and controversial discussions, Revkin points to the “journalistic whiplash” the media perpetuates as conflicting reports from multiple sources flood a confused public with information that may be truncated or out of context, without further explanation beyond its value to attract readers.

Consequently, the public view and understanding of issues like global warming are pre-empted by contradictory, and often times skewed views presented by the media, as Revkin points out in a related article he wrote about how the media emphasizes certain points of view–not for their value in clarifying these issues, but for their appeal as a “front page” headline.

The resulting deluge of information can desensitize the pubic from taking action, all the while ignoring essential matters to be addressed in public policy. For example, while the debate continues on the relationship between hurricanes and global warming, the driving force towards public policy that addresses human impact on the environment need not be delayed.

Revkin acknowledges the need for “persistent disputes as the normal stuttering journey toward improved understanding of how the world works” when it comes to scientific research. On the other hand, Revkin also recognizes that scientists are faced with the challenge of helping journalists understand and communicate their findings in the overall context of research, as well as incorporating ways to effectively communicate science more for the general public. In his article, Revkin lists several web sites that scientists have created to answer the need for better public understanding of climate change: Realclimate.org, Climatepolicy.org, Climateethics.org and ClimateCentral.org.

With all this in mind, how can we ensure that the general public reads media responsibly, understanding the ongoing nature of scientific research with all of its messiness and contradictions towards discovery? Taking our own education in our own hands in understanding these matters is a vital part of the equation.